Wednesday, November 13, 2013

This is an old clip showing admittance of the CIA that they use the mainstreammedia to manipulate the thoughts and ideas of American citizens in the USA. This has not changed obviously and is good to know happened in the past due to our reality today.

The violent crime rate, per 100,000 people, in England is 2,034, while the violent crime rate here in America is 466.

England has banned handguns, banned rifles, restricted the hell out of shotguns, and is starting to ban knives, and yet their violent crime rate is over four times America's. Is there a better indication that banning inanimate objects does not stop criminals?

Potentially worse than the bans, though, is the societal attitude that has accompanied them. England has gradually demonized firearms, firearm ownership, firearm sports, self-defense, and self-reliance over the years, to the point where defending yourself from criminal assaults is almost likely to wind you up in prison. And just as the subjects of England have been trained not to fight back, the criminals know their victims will not resist, which makes them them that much more daring, and their lives that much easier. Hell, even England's own Olympic shooting team has to practice out of the country, on their own dime, because they would be committing a crime if they dared hone their skills inside England.

Unfortunately, the totemists, gun-grabbers, and other hoplophobes in England will only use this unfortunate situation as backing for their endless "do it again, only HARDER" mentaliy, as if continued bans and regulations will stop people who do not care about bans or regulations. Thankfully, we Americans have the opportunity to learn from our once rulers, and not succumb to the idiocy of pointless and ineffective bans that, in reality, only serve to aid and abet criminals in their illegal activities. We, as a country, have no reason to follow in the failed footsteps of once-Great Britain, and I will do my damnest to ensure we never do.SOURCE:http://www.gunslot.com/pictures/england-how-gun-ban-thing-working-not-you-say

There seems to be a lot of confusion about what the NSA is actually doing. Are they reading our emails? Are they listening to our telephone calls? Do they target American citizens or is it only foreigners that they are targeting? Unfortunately, the truth is that we aren’t going to get straight answers from our leaders about this. The folks running the NSA have already shown that they are willing to flat out lie toCongress, and Barack Obama doesn’t exactly have the greatest track record when it comes to telling the truth. These are men that play word games and tell lies for a living. So it would be unrealistic to expect them to come out and tell us the unvarnished truth about what is going on. That is why it is so important that whistleblowers such as Edward Snowden have come forward. Thanks to them and to the brave journalists that are willing to look into these things, we have been able to get some glimpses behind the curtain. And what we have learned is not very pretty. The following are 21 facts about NSA snooping that every American should know…

#1 According to CNET, the NSA told Congress during a recent classified briefing that it does not need court authorization to listen to domestic phone calls…

Rep. Jerrold Nadler, a New York Democrat, disclosed on Thursday that during a secret briefing to members of Congress, he was told that the contents of a phone call could be accessed “simply based on an analyst deciding that.”

If the NSA wants “to listen to the phone,” an analyst’s decision is sufficient, without any other legal authorization required, Nadler said he learned. “I was rather startled,” said Nadler, an attorney and congressman who serves on the House Judiciary committee.

#3 The content of all of our phone calls is being recorded and stored. The following is a from a transcript of an exchange between Erin Burnett of CNN and former FBI counterterrorism agent Tim Clemente which took place just last month…

BURNETT: Tim, is there any way, obviously, there is a voice mail they can try to get the phone companies to give that up at this point. It’s not a voice mail. It’s just a conversation. There’s no way they actually can find out what happened, right, unless she tells them?

CLEMENTE: No, there is a way. We certainly have ways in national security investigations to find out exactly what was said in that conversation. It’s not necessarily something that the FBI is going to want to present in court, but it may helplead the investigation and/or lead to questioning of her. We certainly can find that out.

BURNETT: So they can actually get that? People are saying, look, that is incredible.

CLEMENTE: No, welcome to America. All of that stuff is being captured as we speak whether we know it or like it or not.

#4 The chief technology officer at the CIA, Gus Hunt, made the following statement back in March…

#5 During a Senate Judiciary Oversight Committee hearing in March 2011, FBI Director Robert Mueller admitted that the intelligence community has the ability to access emails “as they come in”…

“We put in place technological improvements relating to the capabilities of a database to pull together past emails and future ones as they come in so that it does not require an individualized search.”

#6 Back in 2007, Director of National Intelligence Michael McConnell told Congress that the president has the “constitutional authority” to authorize domestic spying without warrants no matter when the law says.

#8 The Washington Post is reporting that the NSA has four primary data collection systems…

Two of the four collection programs, one each for telephony and the Internet, process trillions of “metadata” records for storage and analysis in systems called MAINWAY and MARINA, respectively. Metadata includes highly revealing information about the times, places, devices and participants in electronic communication, but not its contents. The bulk collection of telephone call records from Verizon Business Services, disclosed this month by the British newspaper the Guardian, is one source of raw intelligence for MAINWAY.

The other two types of collection, which operate on a much smaller scale, are aimed at content. One of them intercepts telephone calls and routes the spoken words to a system called ­NUCLEON.

#9 The NSA knows pretty much everything that you are doing on the Internet. The following is a short excerpt from a recent Yahoo article…

Americans who disapprove of the government reading their emails have more to worry about from a different and largerNSA effort that snatches data as it passes through the fiber optic cables that make up the Internet’s backbone. That program, which has been known for years, copies Internet traffic as it enters and leaves the United States, then routes it to the NSA for analysis.

#10 The NSA is supposed to be prohibited from spying on the Internet activity of American citizens, but it is doing it anyway…

Despite that prohibition, shortly after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, President George W. Bush secretly authorized the NSA to plug into the fiber optic cables that enter and leave the United States, knowing it would give the government unprecedented, warrantless access to Americans’ private conversations.

Tapping into those cables allows the NSA access to monitor emails, telephone calls, video chats, websites, bank transactions and more. It takes powerful computers to decrypt, store and analyze all this information, but the information is all there, zipping by at the speed of light.

“You have to assume everything is being collected,” said Bruce Schneier, who has been studying and writing about cryptography and computer security for two decades.

#12 In addition to collecting data on their own, a recent Bloomberg articleclaims that “thousands of firms” are giving your personal information directly to the NSA.

#13 Companies that share their data with the NSA are exempt from prosecution due to a law that Congress passed back in 2008…

AT&T and other telecommunications companies that allow the NSA to tap into their fiber links receive absolute immunity from civil liability or criminal prosecution, thanks to a law that Congress enacted in 2008 and renewed in 2012. It’s a series of amendments to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, also known as the FISA Amendments Act.

#14 The NSA is constructing the largest data center in the world out in Utah. It is going to have about a million square feet of storage space, it is going to cost about 2 billion dollars to build, and it is going to take about 40 million dollars a year just to pay for the energy needed to run the facility. It is also being reported that it will have the capability of storing 5 zettabytes of data.

#18 Binney also claims that the NSA “has the capability to do individualized searches, similar to Google, for particular electronic communications in real time through such criteria as target addresses, locations, countries and phone numbers, as well as watch-listed names, keywords, and phrases in email.”

#19 According to a recent Rasmussen survey, 57 percent of all Americans believe that the government will use the information that it collects “to harass political opponents”.

“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

Tuesday, November 12, 2013

Americans have become one of the most spied on people on the face of the earth, and Google now reinforces that with floating spy centers capable of holding levels of information on every one of us that were unimaginable just one generation ago. The electronic prison of the new age is being assembled before our very eyes.

The light of liberty is growing dark, and as it fades the spirit of Antichrist is slithering in behind it.

From Daily Mail UK: A second mystery barge has been discovered – this one docked in Maine, thousands of miles away from the ship spotted in San Fransisco Bay that has set the tech world abuzz.

The vessel in Portland Harbor looks nearly identical to its cousin 2,700 miles away in California – four stories ofshipping containers welded together atop a large flat barge. They are also both registered to the same mysterious Delaware-based corporation.

The ships are widely believed to be owned by Google – built as prototype floating data centers that use ocean water to regulate the intense heat put out by the mass of servers.

This is the secret Hangar 3 on Treasure Island, alongside Pier 1, as seen in Apple Maps, before construction began

Google has refused to comment on the vessels, though a 2009 patent filed by the company describes an environmentally-friendly sea-powered telecommunications and storage system that looks much like the vessels that have appears on both side of the continent. source – Daily Mail UK

A Sheep No More found the following video on YouTube. They've uncovered some interesting information. We're listing this one under "conspiracy" ....because we have no idea what it is.

This following information can be obtained from the above video on YouTube:

Why is NASA censoring STEREO HI2-A images of ISON?PLEASE explain why they're not releasing any pics of ISON on STEREO HI2-A like they said they would & why they never released any photos (worth mentioning) from their Mars craft (as it passed by)? Interestingly, the government shutdown was also timed to shut down the Mars rover

IF EVERYTHING IS SO PEACHY KING, THEN WHY DID THE US COAST GUARD HAVE TO SIGN A CONFIDENTIALITY REPORT AGREEING TO STAY ABSOLUTELY QUIET ABOUT THE TRU PURPOSE OF THE FLOATING GOOGLE BARGES.us coast guard has to sign confidentiality report on floating google barge http://ca.news.yahoo.com/google-takes...

A HOLOGRAM IS A MANIPULATION OF LIGHT FROM DIFFERENT SOURCES TO CREAT A VERY REALISTIC THREE DIMENSIONAL IMAGEOF A PERSON OR OBJECT THAT IS NOT PHYSICALLY PRESENT. THE STUDY AND PRACTICE OF HOLOGRAMS IS CALLED HOLOGRAPHY .

ALL OF A "SUDDEN" THE HISTORY CHANNEL IS SAYING THAT SATAN IS AN ALLY TO HUMANITY RATHER THAN AN ENEMY. How does that pertain to google? I'll tell you. It's because Google is really the US Govt hiding behind a company platform. And if the govt is controlling what comes on TV then that means they know exactly what they are doing.http://www.history.com/shows/ancient-...

President Barack Obama attends the Trans-Pacific Partnership meeting in Yokohama, Japan, on November 14, 2010. Photo by Pete Souza.

By Don Quijones, a freelance writer and translator based in Barcelona, Spain. His blog, Raging Bull-Shit, is a modest attempt to challenge some of the wishful thinking and scrub away the lathers of soft soap peddled by our political and business leaders and their loyal mainstream media.

2013 is proving to be a hectic year for corporate lobbyists and free trade advocates, as they frantically flit, like busy bees pollinating succulent orchids, from one global free trade conference to another. And at long last, it seems that their hard work appears to be paying off.

In the last month alone world leaders from 12 countries, including the U.S., Australia, Japan, New Zealand and Mexico, pledged to sign the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) by the end of the year. On the other side of the globe, meanwhile, Europe has signed a sweeping free trade agreement with Canada.

And what’s more, despite all the furore over allegations of NSA and GCHQ spying on European national leaders, most EU member states are determined to ensure that the fallout from the scandal does not derail ongoing talks for a Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), a treaty that would effectively knit together countries with nearly half the world’s GDP into a massive free-trade zone.

Indeed, the president of the European Parliament, Martin Schulz, has already suggested that it may be necessary to temporarily suspend negotiations — not out of concern for joining in partnership with a nation whose recent actions have betrayed every possible notion of mutual trust, but rather out of fear that continued negotiations in the current climate could feed anti-free trade sentiment:

"If such events continue, and more news comes out, I fear that those who are against the free trade agreement in principle will become the majority,” said Schulz during last week’s EU summit. “My advice is to stop for a moment and discuss how we can avoid such a development."

All of which begs the question: why all the sudden newfound enthusiasm for more free trade? Even more important, why all the secrecy? Why are our leaders desperately reconfiguring the legal super structures of global trade without either consulting their respective voting constituencies or even divulging what is actually up for grabs in the negotiations?

After all, even by official estimates (which, let’s face it, tend to have a strong upward bias) the economic benefits of the trade treaties will be negligible, at best. In the case of the TPIP, the EU and the U.S. can expect to eventually (perhaps after as long as ten years) receive a 100 billion euro boost to their respective GDPs. It’s the sort of money that, once upon a time, may have sounded impressive or even meant something. But not any more, not since the Fed and the Bank of England led the world’s central banking community on the biggest money printing binge in recorded history.

Meanwhile, in the Asia-Pacific region the TPP is forecast to open up massive new opportunities for businesses both large and small, as new trade networks are forged between some of the world’s fastest growing economies.

However, while the potential benefits of the new trade agreement are supposed to be huge, they cannot as yet be divulged to the public. As U.S. trade representative Ron Kirk recently told Reuters, it’s just too early in negotiations to release a draft text to allow more public input. But that’s not to say “there will [not] be a time, once we have agreed on the text, that we may – as we have with other agreements – be able to release that.”

The message could not be clearer: to paraphrase the late, great Bill Hicks, go back to bed America, Europe, Asia and Australasia. Your governments are in control.

The Real Agenda

As for the few insomniacs who remain fully awake, the real end game in this new age of “free” trade (or otherwise put, corporate protectionism) is becoming clearer and clearer. According to Andrew Gavin Marshall, these new agreements have little to do with actual “trade,” and everything to do with expanding the rights and powers of large corporations:

Corporations have become powerful economic and political entities – competing in size and wealth with the world’s largest national economies – and thus have taken on a distinctly ‘cosmopolitical’ nature.

According to a ranking published by Global Trends, 58 percent of the world’s biggest 150 economic entities in 2012 were corporations. They include oil, natural gas and mining majors, banks and insurance firms, telecommunications giants, supermarket behemoths, car manufacturers and pharmaceutical companies.

The highest ranked company on the list, Royal Dutch Shell, recorded 2012 revenues that exceeded the GDPs of 171 countries, making it the 26th largest economic entity in the world. It ranks ahead of Argentina and Taiwan, despite employing only 90,000 people. Indeed, the combined revenues of the five biggest oil companies (Royal Dutch Shell, ExxonMobil, BP, Sinopec and China National Petroleum) were the equivalent of 2.9 percent of global GDP in 2012.

Should we be at all surprised that these massively bloated private corporations still want more for themselves and, by extension, less for us? After all, perpetual profit and revenues growth are their raison d’être; it’s what makes their sociopathic hearts tick.

“Acting through industry associations, lobby groups, think tanks and foundations, cosmopolitical corporations are engineering large projects aimed at transnational economic and political consolidation of power… into their hands,” writes Marshall. “With the construction of ‘a European-American free-trade zone’ as ‘an ambitious project,’ we are witnessing the advancement of a new and unprecedented global project of transatlantic corporate colonization.“

At the root of this model is the basic notion that corporate profits and investor returns must at all times supercede all concerns about public interest. As such, as Open Democracy has pointed out, investor-state dispute settlements under TTIP would empower EU and US-based corporations to engage in litigious wars of attrition to limit the power of governments on both sides of the Atlantic:

Thousands of EU and US companies have affiliates across the Atlantic; under TTIP they could make investor-state claims via these affiliates in order to compel their own governments to refrain from regulations they dislike.

In the sickest of ironies, as a growing number of countries are questioning and even abandoning global investor-state arbitration precisely because of negative impacts against the public interest, powerful corporate lobby groups in both the EU and the US — including the European employers’ federation BusinessEurope, the US Chamber of Commerce, AmCham EU, and the Transatlantic Business Council — are pressuring for the inclusion of investor-state arbitration in TTIP.

The White House says the order will make the process of “streamlining sustainability initiatives” far easier.

Obama signed the executive order in early November, some five months after announcing his new Climate Action Plan, which included climate pollution limits on both new and existing power plants for the very first time. The plan also includes plans to increaserenewable energy production on federal land, aid communities in dealing with higher temperatures, and increase energy efficiencystandards.

But opponents of the plan say it paved the way for side-stepping Congressional oversight on environmental issues and once again diminished states’ rights. The president’s executive order created a task force to advise his administration on the proper way to respond to wildfires, severe storms, droughts and other natural disasters allegedly brought on by climate change.

President Obama’s task force will also offer guidance on response standards for other “potential impacts” spawned by so-called climate change scenarios. The guiding group created by the executive order included seven Democratic governors and the Republican governor of Guam. Hand-picked mayors from 14 cities and two other local leaders round out the list of climate change advisors. The task force includes California Governor Jerry Brown, Washington Governor Jay Inslee, Hawaii Governor Neil Abercrombie, Delaware Governor Jack Markell, Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley, Vermont Governor Peter Shumlin and Illinois Governor Pat Quinn.

The climate change executive order task force will review how federal money is spent on bridges, roads, flood control projects and other infrastructure programs which President Obama believes are impacted by global warming.

According to a FoxNews report, critics say the task force has the power to:

“Hold back money to communities unless they meet new standards on various items and agendas set by the Federal Government. For example, using new policies that will encourage communities to rebuild to pre-disaster standards instead of stronger ones.

Issue a “mandate to bring sweeping new changes to land use and resource policies.

Control and refocus “climate change data and use of it to push a new agenda into every priority of the Federal Government.

“Create the need for a new internal organization for coordination efforts during a government sequestration and possible future shutdowns.

A White House release after the climate change executive order was signed stated that even though the country has worked to curb carbon pollution, government officials need to “improve how states and communities” respond to extreme weather events, upgrade building codes, andaddressclimate change impacton infrastructure.

One former senior government official who spoke to Fox News about the climate change executive order said, “The devil is in the details. Who gets to decides what sustainability is? Or what its outcome means?

Others wonder if the plan is part of what is known as Agenda 21. As previously reported by Off The Grid News, Agenda 21 is a voluntary UN non-binding action plan which is supposedly focused solely on sustainable development. It based upon a program to abolish poverty and the “protection of fragile environments” by pushing citizens into metropolitan areas. America is a “signatory” country to Agenda 21. Since the plan is a non-binding statement and not a treaty, a vote on inclusion was not needed. More than 528 major and moderate-sized American cities are members of an international sustainability organization that reportedly supports the implementation of Agenda 21.

A White House release after the climate change executive order was signed stated that even though the country has worked to curb carbon pollution, government officials need to “improve how states and communities” respond to extreme weather events, upgrade building codes, and address climate change impact on infrastructure.

According to a pair of recent polls, for the first time since the 9/11 terrorist hijackings, Americans are more fearful their government will abuse constitutional liberties than fail to keep its citizens safe.

Even in the wake of the April 15 Boston Marathon bombing – in which a pair of Islamic radicals are accused of planting explosives that took the lives of 3 and wounded over 280 – the polls suggest Americans are hesitant to give up any further freedoms in exchange for increased “security.”

A Fox News survey polling a random national sample of 619 registered voters the day after the bombing found despite the tragic event, those interviewed responded very differently than following 9/11.

For the first time since a similar question was asked in May 2001, more Americans answered “no” to the question, “Would you be willing to give up some of your personal freedom in order to reduce the threat of terrorism?”

Of those surveyed on April 16, 2013, 45 percent answered no to the question, compared to 43 percent answering yes.

In May 2001, before 9/11, the balance was similar, with 40 percent answering no to 33 percent answering yes.

But following the terrorist attacks of 9/11, the numbers flipped dramatically, to 71 percentagreeing to sacrifice personal freedom to reduce the threat of terrorism.

Subsequent polls asking the same question in 2002, 2005 and 2006 found Americans consistently willing to give up freedom in exchange for security. Yet the numbers were declining from 71 percent following 9/11 to only 54 percent by May 2006.

Now, it would seem, the famous quote widely attributed to Benjamin Franklin – “They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety” – is holding more sway with Americans than it has in over a dozen years.

A similar poll sampling 588 adults, conducted on April 17 and 18 for the Washington Post, also discovered the change in attitude.

“Which worries you more,” the Post asked, “that the government will not go far enough toinvestigate terrorism because of concerns about constitutional rights, or that it will go too far in compromising constitutional rights in order to investigate terrorism?”

The poll found 48 percent of respondents worry the government will go too far, compared to 41 percent who worry it won’t go far enough.

And similar to the Fox News poll, the Post found the worry to be a fresh development, as only 44 percent worried the government would go too far in January 2006 and only 27 percent worried the government would go too far in January 2010.

The Fox News poll found that a bare majority of Democrats (51%) would give up more personal freedom to reduce the threat of terror, while only 47% of Republicans – and a mere 29% of independents – would do so.

The latest national survey by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, conducted Jan. 9-13 among 1,502 adults, finds that 53% think that the federal government threatens their own personal rights and freedoms while 43% disagree.

In March 2010, opinions were divided over whether the government represented a threat to personal freedom; 47% said it did while 50% disagreed. In surveys between 1995 and 2003, majorities rejected the idea that the government threatened people’s rights and freedoms.

***

The survey finds continued widespread distrust in government. About a quarter of Americans (26%) trust the government in Washington to do the right thing just about always or most of the time; 73% say they can trust the government only some of the time or volunteer that they can never trust the government.

***

Majorities across all partisan and demographic groups express little or no trust in government.

Obviously, Democrats are currently more trusting in government than Republicans. For example:

The Pew Research Center’s 2010 study of attitudes toward government found that, since the 1950s, the party in control of the White House has expressed more trust in government than the so-called “out party.”

But given that even a growing percentage of Dems believe that government is a threat to their freedom, things are indeed getting interesting …